HTTP Working Group C. Pratt
Internet-Draft CableLabs
Intended status: Experimental B. Stark
Expires: September 8, 2017 AT&T
D. Thakore
CableLabs
March 7, 2017
HTTP Random Access and Live Content
draft-ietf-httpbis-rand-access-live-00
Abstract
To accommodate byte range requests for content that has data appended
over time, this document defines semantics that allow a HTTP client
and server to perform byte-range GET and HEAD requests that start at
an arbitrary byte offset within the representation and ends at an
indeterminate offset.
Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
Discussion of this draft takes place on the HTTPBIS working group
mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org), which is archived at
.
Working Group information can be found at ;
source code and issues list for this draft can be found at
.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 8, 2017.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Performing Range requests on Random-Access Aggregating
("live") Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Establishing the Randomly Accessible Byte Range . . . . . 4
2.2. Byte-Range Requests Beyond the Randomly Accessible Byte
Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Byte-Range Responses Beyond the Randomly Accessible Byte
Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Other Applications of Random-Access Aggregating Content . . . 6
3.1. Requests Starting at the Aggregation ("Live") Point . . . 6
3.2. Shift Buffer Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
Some Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Clients use byte-range
requests (Range requests using the "bytes" Range Unit) to transfer
select portions of large representations. And in some cases large
representations require content to be continuously or periodically
appended - such as representations consisting of live audio or video
sources, blockchain databases, and log files. Clients cannot access
the appended/live content using a Range request with the bytes range
unit using the currently defined byte-range semantics without
accepting performance or behavior sacrifices which are not acceptable
for many applications.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
For instance, HTTP Clients have the ability to access appended
content by simply transferring the entire accessible portion of the
representation from the beginning and continuing to read the appended
content as it's made available. Obviously, this is highly
inefficient for cases where the representation is large and only a
portion of the randomly accessible content is needed by the Client.
And when bandwidth is limited, the client may never "catch up" with
the appending content.
Clients can also attempt to access appended content by sending
periodic bytes Range requests using the last-known end byte position
(polling). Performing low-frequency periodic bytes Range requests in
this fashion (polling) introduces latency since the Client will
necessarily be somewhat behind the aggregated content - mimicking the
behavior (and latency) of segmented content representations such as
HLS or MPEG-DASH. And performing these Range requests at higher
frequency incurs more processing overhead and HTTP traffic as the
periodic requests will often return no content - since content is
usually aggregated in groups of bytes (e.g. a video frame, audio
sample, block, or log entry).
To accommodate byte-range requests on large representations which
have data appended over time efficiently and with low latency, this
recommendation defines semantics whereby the HTTP Client performs
byte-range requests using a combination of open-ended byte-range HEAD
requests and GET requests using "Large Value" last-byte-pos values.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. Performing Range requests on Random-Access Aggregating ("live")
Content
There are two critical operations for accessing randomly accessing
live/aggregating representations:
Establishing the randomly accessible range of the representation,
and
Performing range requests that continue beyond the randomly
accessible range.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
2.1. Establishing the Randomly Accessible Byte Range
Establishing if a representation is continuously aggregating ("live")
and determining the randomly accessible byte range can both be
determined using the existing definition for an open-ended byte-range
request. Specifically, [RFC7233] defines a byte-range request of the
form:
byte-range-spec = first-byte-pos "-" [ last-byte-pos ]
which allows a Client to send a request with a first-byte-pos and
leave last-byte-pos absent. A Server that receives a satisfiable
byte-range request (with first-byte-pos smaller than the current
representation length) must respond with a 206 status code (Partial
Content) with a Content-Range header indicating the currently
satisfiable byte range. For example, a Client-issued HEAD request
performed against a continuously aggregating representation hosted on
a Server could contain a byte-range header of the form:
Range: bytes=0-
could return
Content-Range: bytes 0-1234567/*
from the Server indicating that (1) the complete representation
length is unknown (via the "*" in place of the complete-length field)
and (2) that only bytes 0-1234567 were accessable at the time the
request was processed. The Client can infer from this response that
bytes 0-1234567 of the representation can be requested and returned
in a timely fashion (the bytes are immediately available).
2.2. Byte-Range Requests Beyond the Randomly Accessible Byte Range
Once a Client has determined that a representation has an
indeterminate length and established the byte range that can be
accessed, it may want to perform a request that starts within the
randomly accessible content range and ends at an indefinite "live"
point - a point where the byte-range GET request is fulfilled on-
demand as the content is aggregated.
For example, for a large video asset, a client may wish to start a
content transfer from the video "key" frame immediately before the
point of aggregation and continue the content transfer indefinitely
as content is aggregated - in order to support low-latency startup of
a live video stream.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
Unlike a byte-range Range request, a byte-range Content-Range
response header cannot be "open ended", per [RFC7233]:
byte-content-range = bytes-unit SP ( byte-range-resp /
unsatisfied-range )
byte-range-resp = byte-range "/" ( complete-length / "*" )
byte-range = first-byte-pos "-" last-byte-pos
unsatisfied-range = "*/" complete-length
complete-length = 1*DIGIT
last-byte-pos is required in byte-range. So in order to preserve
interoperability with existing HTTP clients, servers, proxies, and
caches, this document proposes a mechanism for a Client to indicate
support for handling an indeterminate-length byte-range response, and
a mechanism for a Server to indicate if/when it's providing a
indeterminate-length response.
A Client can indicate support for indeterminate-length byte-ranges by
providing a Very Large Value for the last-byte-pos in the byte-range
request. For example, a Client can perform a byte-range GET request
of the form:
Range: bytes=1230000-999999999999
where the last-byte-pos in the Request is much larger than the last-
byte-pos returned in response to an open-ended byte-range request.
2.3. Byte-Range Responses Beyond the Randomly Accessible Byte Range
A Server may indicate that it is supplying an continuously
aggregating ("live") response by supplying the Client request's last-
byte-pos in the Content-Range response header.
For example:
Range: bytes=1230000-999999999999
could return
Content-Range: bytes 1230000-999999999999/*
from the Server to indicate that the response will start at byte
1230000 and continues indefinitely to include all aggregated content,
as it becomes available.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
A Server that doesn't support or supply a continuously aggregating
("live") response should supply the currently satisfiable byte range,
as it would with an open-ended byte request.
For example:
Range: bytes=1230000-999999999999
could return
Content-Range: bytes 1230000-1234567/*
from the Server to indicate that the response will start at byte
1230000 and end at byte 1234567 and will not include any aggregated
content. This is the response expected from a typically-configured
HTTP Server - one that doesn't support byte-range requests on
aggregated content.
A Client that doesn't receive a response indicating it is
continuously aggregating must use other means to access aggregated
content (e.g. periodic byte-range polling).
A Server that returns a continuously aggregating ("live") response
should return data using chunked transfer coding and not provide a
Content-Length header. A 0-length chunk indicates that aggregation
of the transferring resource is permanently discontinued.
3. Other Applications of Random-Access Aggregating Content
3.1. Requests Starting at the Aggregation ("Live") Point
If a Client would like to start the content transfer at the
Aggregation ("live") point without including any randomly accessible
portion of the representation, then it should supply the last-byte-
pos from the most-recently received byte-range-spec and a Very Large
Value for the last-byte-pos in the byte-range request.
For example a HEAD request containing:
Range: bytes=0-
could return
Content-Range: bytes 0-1234567/*
and a GET request containing
Range: bytes=1234567-999999999999
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
could return
Content-Range: bytes 1234567-999999999999/*
with the response body starting with continuously aggregating
("live") data and continuing indefinitely.
3.2. Shift Buffer Representations
Some representations lend themselves to front-end content deletion in
addition to aggregation. While still supporting random access,
representations of this type have a portion at the beginning ("0"
end) of the randomly accessible region become inaccessible over time.
Examples of this kind of representation would be a audio-video time-
shift buffer or a rolling log file.
For example a HEAD request containing:
Range: bytes=0-
could return
Content-Range: bytes 1000000-1234567/*
indicating that the first 1000000 bytes were not accessible at the
time the HEAD request was processed. Subsequent HEAD requests could
return:
Content-Range: bytes 1000000-1234567/*
Content-Range: bytes 1010000-1244567/*
Content-Range: bytes 1020000-1254567/*
Note though that the difference between the first-byte-pos and last-
byte-pos need not be constant.
The Client could then follow-up with a GET request containing
Range: bytes=1020000-999999999999
with the Server returning
Content-Range: bytes 1020000-999999999999/*
with the response body returning bytes 1020000-1254567 immediately
and aggregated ("live") data being returned as the content is
aggregated.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
4. Security Considerations
One potential issue with this recommendation is related to the use of
very-large last-byte-pos values. Some Client and Server
implementations may not be prepared to deal with byte position values
of 2^^63 and beyond. So in applications where there's no expectation
that the representation will ever exceed 2^^63, a value smaller than
this value should be used as the Very Large last-byte-pos in a byte-
seek request or content-range response.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
.
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing",
RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014,
.
[RFC7233] Fielding, R., Ed., Lafon, Y., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed.,
"Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Range Requests",
RFC 7233, DOI 10.17487/RFC7233, June 2014,
.
5.2. Informative References
[RANGE-UNIT-REGISTRY]
IANA, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Parameters",
2016, .
[RFC4234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, DOI 10.17487/RFC4234,
October 2005, .
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Mark Nottingham, Patrick McManus, Julian Reschke, Remy Lebeau, Rodger
Combs, Thorsten Lohmar, Martin Thompson, Adrien de Croy, K. Morgan,
Roy T. Fielding, Jeremy Poulter.
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft http-rand-access-live March 2017
Authors' Addresses
Craig Pratt
CableLabs
858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO 80027
Email: pratt@acm.org
Barbara Stark
AT&T
Atlanta, GA
US
Email: barbara.stark@att.com
Darshak Thakore
CableLabs
858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO 80027
Email: d.thakore@cablelabs.com
Pratt, et al. Expires September 8, 2017 [Page 9]